Characteristics of the ID-NOW™ test for the rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the sensitivity and specificity of the Abbott ID-NOW™ test in the diagnosis of COVID-19. The test is based on the detection of the SARS-CoV-2 gene by isothermal amplification technology. METHODS: From 303 individuals, two nasopharyngeal swabs and one oropharyngeal swab were collected to be tested in parallel by the ID-NOW™ test and PCR test (Allplex™ SARS-CoV-2 Assay). A subgroup of 107 individuals presented to the public collection point for covid-19 at the Motol University Hospital during the dominance of the Delta variant, and the others were tested via the Adult Emergency Admission Department during the dominance of the Omicron variant. RESULTS: Of 297 valid samples, 43 were positive by the PCR assay and 33 were positive by the ID-NOW™ test (sensitivity 76.74%; 95% CI 61.37 to 88.24%). ID-NOW™ detected three samples as positive, but the positivity was not confirmed by PCR (specificity 98.82%; 95% CI 96.59 to 99.76%). A significant increase in sensitivity up to 100% is observed for samples with a higher viral load (with a PCR threshold cycle value below 30 or from patients with symptoms of COVID-19). The Delta or Omicron variant has no significant effect on the sensitivity of the test. CONCLUSION: Due to its ease of use and speed of result, ID-NOW™ is a suitable diagnostic tool for prompt assessment of a patient's infectivity. If, despite the negative ID-NOW™ result, the patient has symptoms of COVID-19, it is advised to perform a classic PCR test for SARS-CoV-2.

Evaluation of Abbott ID NOW COVID-19 POC test performance characteristics and integration in the regional health network workflows to improve health care delivery.

With the recent global surge of SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant, there continues to be high demand for COVID-19 diagnostic testing. Abbott ID NOW is a rapid, CLIA-waived, COVID-19 diagnostic test ideally suited for use in urgent care settings or where access to diagnostic testing is limited. In this study we describe the results of rigorous validation of ID NOW and post-implementation study of POC test utilization patterns within community hospitals and clinics. Performance of ID NOW was validated by comparison of the results from 207 consecutive, paired, specimens tested on the ID NOW and on the m2000/Alinity m platforms. Once validated, ID NOW devices were placed for clinical use at four regional hospitals and clinics. We found that the ID NOW and m2000/Alinity m positive and negative percent agreement were 94.5% (95% CI, 85.1% to 98.1%) and 99.3% (95% CI, 96.4% to 99.9%), respectively. As of August 2021, a total of 2,301 tests were performed by ID NOW at individual regional network sites. The population tested consisted of 55.5% White and 42.9% Black patients, with Black patients presenting predominantly in the hospitals, while White patients were more evenly distributed between hospital and clinic sites. Disease prevalence observed among patients tested by ID NOW (12.3%) was aligned with overall prevalence seen at regional sites (11.3%). In summary, the ID NOW test can provide rapid and accurate results in a variety of near-to-patient and POC settings. If used correctly, it could serve as a valuable diagnostic tool to enable equal access to care and improve healthcare delivery within large health network systems.

Application of Abbott ID NOW in the emergency department for SARS-CoV-2 detection: A medical center's perspective.

Testing for SARS-CoV-2 is crucial to tracking and controlling the pandemic. In particular, rapid testing in settings such as the emergency department (ED) could improve time to diagnosis and promote proper infection control measures. Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, we implemented the Abbott ID NOW COVID-19 method for screening symptomatic ED patients. However, due to concerns of suboptimal sensitivity, samples with a negative result were reflexed to the lab for confirmatory testing by the TaqPath COVID-19 Combo RT-PCR method. This study analyzed 6773 ID NOW results from April 2020 to September 2020 in the ED, of which 10% (n = 673) were positive and reported directly. The rest 90% (n = 6100) were negative and reflexed to RT-PCR. Among them, 3% (n = 175) turned positive on RT-PCR while 97% (n = 5925) of the results were consistently negative. The cycle threshold (Ct) values of the false-negative samples (n = 175) showed 90% (n = 158) of them with relatively low viral loads (Ct ≥ 30) with median Ct value at 35, while a number of samples (n = 17) had low Ct values (Ct < 30) and no clear explanation for false-negative results. Our study demonstrates that the Abbott ID NOW, despite it's sensitivity limitations, was capable of providing near real-time results for 10% of symptomatic patients presenting to the ED allowing for improved management and workflow. However, our study findings emphasize the need to reflex negative specimens to a higher sensitivity method when prevalence is high and false-negative results are intolerable.

Fast and reliable real life data on COVID-19 triaging with ID NOW.

In the context of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, rapid and easy-to-perform diagnostic methods are essential to limit the spread of the virus and for the clinical management of COVID-19 patients. Although real-time polymerase chain reaction remains the "gold standard" to diagnose acute infections, this technique is expensive, requires trained personnel, well-equipped laboratory and is time-consuming. A prospective evaluation of the Abbott ID NOW COVID-19 point-of-care testing that uses isothermal nucleic acid amplification for the qualitative detection of SARS-CoV-2 RdRp gene was run in the Emergency Department during the third wave of COVID-19 pandemic. ID-NOW significantly simplified SARS-CoV-2 identification and COVID-19 patient triaging, being highly valuable in rapidly locating febrile patients in or out of COVID-19 areas, and can be considered as a first-line diagnostic test in the Emergency Room setting.

Evaluation of the ID NOW among symptomatic individuals during the Omicron wave.

Introduction. Starting in December, 2020, the ID NOW was implemented throughout the province of Alberta, Canada (population 4.4 million) in various settings.Gap statement. ID NOW's test performance with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant BA.1 is unknown.Aim. To assess the ID NOW performance among symptomatic individuals during the BA.1 Omicron wave and compare it to previous SARS-CoV-2 variant waves.Methodology. The ID NOW was assessed in two locations among symptomatic individuals: rural hospitals and community assessment centres (AC) during the period 5-18 January 2022. Starting 5 January, Omicron represented >95 % of variants detected in our population. For every individual tested, two swabs were collected: one for ID NOW testing and the other for either reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) confirmation of negative ID NOW results or for variant testing of positive ID NOW results.Results. A total of 3041 paired samples were analysed (1139 RT-PCR positive). From this, 1873 samples were from 42 COVID-19 AC and 1168 from 69 rural hospitals. ID NOW sensitivity for symptomatic individuals presenting to community AC and rural hospitals was 96.0 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) 94.5-97.3 %, n=830 RT-PCR positive], and 91.6 % (95 % CI 87.9-94.4 %, n=309 RT-PCR positive), respectively. SARS-CoV-2 positivity rate was very high for both populations (44.3 % at AC, 26.5 % in hospital).Conclusions. Sensitivity of ID NOW SARS-CoV-2, compared to RT-PCR, is very high during the BA.1 Omicron wave, and is significantly higher when compared to previous SARS-CoV-2 variant waves.

COVID-19 rapid molecular point-of-care testing is effective and cost-beneficial for the acute care of trauma patients.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy and cost benefit of a rapid molecular point-of-care testing (POCT) device detecting COVID-19 within a traumatological emergency department. BACKGROUND: Despite continuous withdrawal of COVID-19 restrictions, hospitals will remain particularly vulnerable to local outbreaks which is reflected by a higher institution-specific basic reproduction rate. Patients admitted to the emergency department with unknown COVID-19 infection status due to a- or oligosymptomatic COVID-19 infection put other patients and health care workers at risk, while fast diagnosis and treatment is necessary. Delayed testing results in additional costs to the health care system. METHODS: From the 8th of April 2021 until 31st of December 2021, all patients admitted to the emergency department were tested with routine RT-PCR and rapid molecular POCT device (Abbott ID NOW™ COVID-19). COVID-19-related additional costs for patients admitted via shock room or emergency department were calculated based on internal cost allocations. RESULTS: 1133 rapid molecular tests resulted in a sensitivity of 83.3% (95% CI 35.9-99.6%), specificity of 99.8% (95% CI 99.4-100%), a positive predictive value of 71.4% (95% CI 29-96.3%) and a negative predictive value of 99.9% (95% CI 99.5-100%) as compared to RT-PCR. Without rapid COVID-19 testing, each emergency department and shock room admission with subsequent surgery showed additional direct costs of 2631.25€, without surgery of 729.01€. CONCLUSION: Although rapid molecular COVID-19 testing can initially be more expensive than RT-PCR, subsequent cost savings, improved workflows and workforce protection outweigh this effect by far. The data of this study support the use of a rapid molecular POCT device in a traumatological emergency department.

Abbott ID NOW™ COVID-19 assay: do not discard the swab.

We compared the performance of ID NOW™ COVID-19 assay nasal swabs with RT-PCR of nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 in an outbreak setting, determining whether addition of RT-PCR of residual nasal swabs (rNS) (post ID NOW™ elution) would increase overall analytic sensitivity. Devices were placed at 2 long term and 1 acute care sites and 51 participants were recruited. Prospective paired nasopharyngeal and nasal samples were collected for RT-PCR and ID NOW™.  ID NOW™ had a positive and negative categorical agreement of 86% and 93% compared to RT-PCR of nasopharyngeal swabs. Sensitivity and specificity of the ID NOW™ was 86% and 100%, positive and negative predictive value was 100% and 95% (COVID-19 positivity rate: 8%). Addition of rNS RT-PCR increased the positive and negative categorical agreement to 93% and 97%. Based on these results, we propose an alternative workflow which includes complementary testing of rNS on a secondary assay.

Prospective population-level validation of the Abbott ID NOW severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 device implemented in multiple settings for testing asymptomatic and symptomatic individuals.

OBJECTIVE: Diagnostic evaluation of the ID NOW coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) assay in various real-world settings among symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals. METHODS: Depending on the setting, the ID NOW testing was performed using oropharyngeal swabs (OPSs) taken from patients with symptoms suggestive of COVID-19, asymptomatic close contacts, or asymptomatic individuals as part of outbreak point prevalence screening. From January to April 2021, a select number of sites switched from using OPS to combined oropharyngeal and nasal swab (O + NS) for ID NOW testing. For every individual tested, two swabs were collected by a health care worker: one swab (OPS or O + NS) for ID NOW testing and a separate swab (OPS or nasopharyngeal swab) for RT-PCR. RESULTS: A total of 129 112 paired samples were analysed (16 061 RT-PCR positive). Of these, 81 697 samples were from 42 COVID-19 community collection sites, 16 924 samples were from 69 rural hospitals, 1927 samples were from nine emergency shelters and addiction treatment facilities, 23 802 samples were from six mobile units that responded to 356 community outbreaks, and 4762 O + NS swabs were collected from three community collection sites and one emergency shelter. The ID NOW assay sensitivity was the highest among symptomatic individuals presenting to community collection sites (92.5%; 95% CI, 92.0-93.0%) and the lowest for asymptomatic individuals associated with community outbreaks (73.9%; 95% CI, 69.8-77.7%). Specificity was >99% in all populations tested. DISCUSSION: The sensitivity of ID NOW severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 testing is the highest when used in symptomatic community populations not seeking medical care. Sensitivity and positive predictive value drop by approximately 10% when tested on asymptomatic populations. Using combined oropharyngeal and nasal swabs did not improve the performance of ID NOW assay.

Evaluation of Four Fully Integrated Molecular Assays for the Detection of Respiratory Viruses during the Co-Circulation of SARS-CoV-2, Influenza and RSV.

Background: The clinical presentation of viral respiratory infections is unspecific. We assessed the performances of two new RT-PCR, the Idylla™ SARS-CoV-2 and the Idylla™ SARS-CoV2/Flu/RSV, and two isothermal amplification assays, the ID NOW COVID and the ID NOW influenza A & B 2. Methods: The study was conducted in two parts: (i) the Idylla™ assays were assessed using a collection of nasopharyngeal swabs which were positive for various respiratory viruses. (ii) The performances of the four assays were assessed prospectively: all of the symptomatic patients admitted to the emergency department from 10 to 21 December were enrolled. Results: (i) All of the SARS-CoV-2 false negatives with the Idylla™ assays had a Ct value greater than 30 with the reference RT-PCR. No cross-reactivity was identified. (ii) Overall, 218 patients were enrolled. The respective prevalences of SARS-CoV-2, influenza A, and RSV were 19.8%, 4.8%, and 3.2%. All of the assays were 100% specific. The sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 detection was 97.7%, 82.5%, and 86.3% for the Idylla™ SARS-CoV2, the Idylla™ SARS-CoV2/Flu/RSV, and the ID NOW COVID-19, respectively. For influenza A, it was 90.0% for the Idylla™ SARS-CoV2/Flu/RSV and 80.0% for the ID NOW Influenza. Discussion. All of the assays are suitable for testing patients with respiratory symptoms. False negatives should be considered, and the test should be repeated regarding the context.

Abbott® ID NOW™ COVID-19 rapid molecular assay versus Hologic® Panther Aptima™ SARS-CoV-2 assay in nasopharyngeal specimens: results from 1-year retrospective study in an emergency department.

We compared ID Now™ and Hologic® Panther Aptima™ for the detection of SARS-COV-2. ID Now™ showed a positive and negative percent agreement of 86.9% and 99.7% respectively. This facilitates faster clinical decision-making, along with the rapid implementation of infection control measures, and improvement of patient flow in the emergency department toward inpatient wards.

Verification of lateral flow antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 by qPCR directly from the test device.

OBJECTIVE: Fast and reliable detection of infection is a key to control the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Lateral flow antigen tests (LFATs) are inexpensive, easy to use, but have to be verified, as they are rather unspecific and can produce both, false positive and false negative results. Our objective was to combine the speed of LFAT for SARS-CoV-2 with the reliability of qPCR tests. METHODS: A serial dilution of a patient sample positive for SARS-CoV-2 was prepared and added to LFAT wells from two manufacturers. After evaluation, the devices were opened, the strips removed and extracted in a solution. Amplification was performed using point of care PCR systems (cobas® Liat®, ID NOW™) or on a LightCycler after extraction by MagNAPure 96. RESULTS: The nucleic acid amplification systems yielded higher sensitivity to LFAT. Thus, all samples determined positive by LFAT from the serial dilution were also positive in the subsequent amplification reactions. Sensitivity using extracted eluates was 10-100 times higher. SIGNIFICANCE: The usage of LFAT is highly recommended for single samples in emergency dental or emergency clinical settings, for smaller cohorts, or even for larger population screening, as it is inexpensive and fast. Positive results can be conveniently verified directly from the test devices using either point of care test equipment or more complex laboratory equipment thus making a major impact on efficient management of infections and isolations.

Evaluating the Ability to ID (COVID-19) NOW: a Large Real-World Prospective Evaluation of the Abbott ID NOW COVID-19 Assay.

The Abbott ID NOW COVID-19 assay is a rapid point-of-care molecular test for SARS-CoV-2 detection. In theory, it has the potential to decrease turnaround times (TATs) and rapidly facilitate patient flow and triage. Reports for its performance have been mixed, likely due to variations in patient cohorts, preanalytical considerations, and study design. We prospectively evaluated the ID NOW performance against reference reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) tests, using dual swabs. Patients presented at a large multisite academic hospital with the highest volumes of COVID-19 admissions in Canada. From 1,968 valid swabs, 186 were true positive, 1,760 were true negative, 21 were false negatives, and 1 was false positive. At 10.5% positivity rate, the positive and negative predictive values were 99.5% and 98.8%, respectively. This led to a modest increase in the pretest probability in this cohort of individuals presenting <7 days of symptom onset. The mean times from collection to laboratory receipt and receipt to reporting were 31 and 23 min, respectively. This reduced TAT observed in our study may assist with triage of admitted patients and breaking the chain of transmission through immediate notification of status. We also observed how test performance changed with prevalence, and thus, how the test is used to "rule in" or "rule out" disease must be considered. Although the ID NOW is regarded as a rapid test, it is not high throughput and requires rapid transportation times (<1 h) that may not be plausible in large centers. The utility of this test should be considered with the observed TAT and interpreted in the context of limitations discussed. IMPORTANCE Rapid testing for COVID-19 has been recognized as one potentially important measure in managing the pandemic. However, these rapid tests vary grossly in their performance and their applicability. There have been many studies evaluating the performance of rapid tests for SARS-CoV-2 detection. However, they are frequently not prospective, and patients are not simultaneously swabbed to compare the reference standard RT-PCR. Previous ID NOW study findings are mixed, which may be due to various factors, including patient, epidemiological, and preanalytical considerations. It is critical to consider how the pretest and posttest probabilities and epidemiological factors may affect the performance as the community prevalence of disease fluctuates during this highly dynamic pandemic. We consider how the ID NOW may be utilized in different settings, with considerations of public health and infection control and prevention risk tolerance.

Evaluation of water gargle samples for SARS-CoV-2 detection using Abbott ID NOW COVID-19 assay.

The Abbott ID NOW™ COVID-19 assay has been shown as a reliable and sensitive alternative to reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing from nasopharyngeal or nasal samples in symptomatic patients. Water gargle is an acceptable noninvasive alternative specimen for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection by RT-PCR. The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of water gargle samples for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 using the ID NOW. Residual gargle samples were randomly selected among positive standard of care (SOC)-nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) samples. For testing on ID NOW, the manufacturer's instructions were followed, except for the specimen addition step: 500 µl of the gargle specimen was added to the blue sample receiver with a pipette and gently mixed. Among the 202 positive samples by SOC-NAAT, 185 were positive by ID NOW (positive percent agreement [PPA]) = 91.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 86.9-95.0). For the 17 discordant samples, cycle threshold (Ct ) values were all ≥31.0. The PPA was significantly lower among asymptomatic patients (84.4%; 95% CI: 73.2-92.3) versus symptomatic patients (95.2%; 95% CI: 89.8-98.2). The performance of the ID NOW for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection on gargle samples is excellent when Ct values are <31.0 and for patients that have COVID-19 compatible symptoms.

Comparison of Abbott ID NOW, a novel isothermal amplification based COVID-19 diagnostic method with RTPCR.

BACKGROUND: The emergent crisis of the COVID-19 pandemic has posed enormous challenges for clinical laboratories to speed up diagnostics. The current reference standard for the diagnosis of COVID-19 is real time reverse transcriptase PCR on various platforms. However, even with automation, the turnaround time is huge enough to keep up with ever increasing numbers of patients. With increasing surge of COVID cases we need rapid diagnostic tests with good sensitivity and specificity. OBJECTIVES: Comparison between Abbott ID NOW COVID-19 and real time reverse transcriptase PCR as a reference method. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Specimens from seventy-two individuals were obtained over a period of two months which were processed for ID NOW and RTPCR at a dedicated COVID-19 centre of AIIMS. Dry nasal swabs were used for ID NOW while nasopharyngeal swabs along with throat swab were used for RTPCR. Among the participants, 15 were healthcare workers. Mild COVID was seen in 36 participants, moderate in 19 and severe in 9. Eight participants had non COVID illness. RESULTS: From the given samples, we observed that ID NOW has a sensitivity of 93.22% (55/59) specificity 100% (13/13), PPV 100% (55/55) and NPV 76.47% (13/17). CONCLUSION: ID NOW is a convenient, rapid molecular test which makes it suitable for both in laboratory use and as a point of care test. It can be a rapid rule-in test for COVID-19. Negative results, however, have to be interpreted as per the context.

Diagnostic accuracy of the Abbott ID NOW SARS-CoV-2 rapid test for the triage of acute medical admissions.

BACKGROUND: Decisions to isolate patients at risk of having coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the emergency department (ED) must be rapid and accurate to ensure prompt treatment and maintain patient flow whilst minimising nosocomial spread. Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assays are too slow to achieve this, and near-patient testing is being used increasingly to facilitate triage. The ID NOW severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) assay is an isothermal nucleic acid amplification near-patient test which targets the RNA-dependent RNA-polymerase gene. AIM: To assess the diagnostic performance of ID NOW as a COVID-19 triage tool for medical admissions from the ED of a large acute hospital. METHODS: All adult acute medical admissions from the ED between 31st March and 31st July 2021 with valid ID NOW and RT-PCR results were included. The diagnostic accuracy of ID NOW [sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV)] was calculated against the laboratory reference standard. Discrepant results were explored further using cycle threshold values and clinical data. FINDINGS: Two percent (124/6050) of medical admissions were SARS-CoV-2 positive on RT-PCR. Compared with PCR, ID NOW had sensitivity and specificity of 83.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) 75.4-88.7] and 99.5% (95% CI 99.3-99.6), respectively. PPV and NPV were 76.9% (95% CI 69.0-83.2) and 99.6% (95% CI 99.5-99.8), respectively. The median time from arrival in the ED to ID NOW result was 59 min. CONCLUSION: ID NOW provides a rapid and reliable adjunct for the safe triage of patients with COVID-19, and can work effectively when integrated into an ED triage algorithm.

Comparative Evaluation of Cartridge-Based Abbott ID NOW Test With Probe-Based Real-Time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction Assay for Detection of SARS-CoV-2.

BACKGROUND: The gold standard test for detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) recommended by WHO is real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), which has a turnaround time of five to six hours. Abbott ID NOW (Abbott Diagnostics Scarborough, Inc., Scarborough, ME, USA), the cartridge-based loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assay, was approved by FDA for Emergency Use Authorization as rapid point of care testing. The present study was planned to evaluate the performance of the cartridge-based Abbott ID NOW test by comparing it to the currently used standard probe-based real-time RT-PCR method for detection of SARS-CoV-2. METHODOLOGY: A cross-sectional study was conducted in a tertiary care hospital in the eastern part of India after getting institutional ethics committee (IEC) approval. Two hundred fifty-nine cases of various age groups of both sexes who were advised for testing for SARS-CoV-2 were included in the study. Nasopharyngeal swabs were collected according to protocol advisory by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), India. Dry swabs were sent for Abbott ID NOW testing and swabs in viral transport medium were sent for probe-based RT-PCR assay using the CoviPath kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Bangalore, India). The data were collected and statistical analysis was performed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values for ID NOW were calculated taking RT-PCR as the gold standard.  Results: Out of 259 patients enrolled in the study, 49% were symptomatic for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The prevalence rate of SARS-CoV-2 was 20.84% among the study population. Sensitivity and specificity, positive and negative predictive values of ID NOW test in comparison to RT-PCR assay was found to be 87%, 98%, 92.1% and 96.8% respectively. ID NOW detected seven out of 54 (12.9%) cases as false negative who were found to be positive with RT-PCR, with mean Ct value of the target genes >34. CONCLUSIONS: In this study the overall sensitivity for ID NOW assay was found to be lower, but specificity, positive and negative predictive values were found to be higher. It had the highest correlation to RT-PCR among symptomatic patients and at higher viral loads. Due to the ease of use and shortest result time for detecting COVID-19, ID NOW test could be used as a point-of-care test. But for all tests, the results should be interpreted according to the clinical and epidemiological context.

The PRONTO study: Clinical performance of ID NOW in individuals with compatible SARS-CoV-2 symptoms in walk-in centres-accelerated turnaround time for contact tracing.

BACKGROUND: This PRONTO study investigated the clinical performance of the Abbott ID NOWTM (IDN) COVID-19 diagnostic assay used at point of care and its impact on turnaround time for divulgation of test results. METHODS: Prospective study conducted from December 2020 to February 2021 in acute symptomatic participants presenting in three walk-in centres in the province of Québec. RESULTS: Valid paired samples were obtained from 2,372 participants. A positive result on either the IDN or the standard-of-care nucleic acid amplification test (SOC-NAAT) was obtained in 423 participants (prevalence of 17.8%). Overall sensitivity of IDN and SOC-NAAT were 96.4% (95% CI: 94.2-98.0%) and 99.1% (95% CI: 97.6-99.8), respectively; negative predictive values were 99.2% (95% CI: 98.7-99.6%) and 99.8% (95% CI: 99.5-100%), respectively. Turnaround time for positive results was significantly faster on IDN. CONCLUSION: In our experience, IDN use in symptomatic individuals in walk-in centres is a reliable sensitive alternative to SOC-NAAT without the need for subsequent confirmation of negative results. Such deployment can accelerate contact tracing, reduce the burden on laboratories and increase access to testing.

Implementation of the Abbott ID Now COVID-19 assay at a tertiary care center: a prospective pragmatic implementation study during the third wave of SARS-CoV-2 in Ontario.

The Abbott ID Now COVID-19 assay is a point-of-care molecular diagnostic tool for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. We prospectively monitored implementation of the assay in a tertiary care hospital emergency department (ED) for the diagnosis of early symptomatic patients. A total of 269 paired nasopharyngeal swabs were tested in parallel with the ID Now and laboratory-based molecular methodologies, 191 of which met selection criteria for testing based on symptoms description and duration. Forty-six and 48 samples were positive for SARS-CoV-2 with the ID Now and reference molecular assays respectively. Percent positive and negative agreement were high (93.8% and 99.6% respectively), as were the sensitivity and specificity (93.8% and 99.5%). ID Now results were available 17.47 hours earlier than qRT-PCR. In symptomatic patients seen in ED within 7 to 10 days of symptoms onset, the ID Now COVID-19 assay allows for rapid and accurate detection of infection.

Prospective evaluation of ID NOW COVID-19 assay used as point-of-care test in an emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Rapid testing for COVID-19 has been clearly identified as an essential component of the strategy to control the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic, worldwide. The ID NOW COVID-19 assay is a simple, user-friendly, rapid molecular biology test based on nicking and extension amplification reaction (NEAR). OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the ID NOW COVID-19 assay when used as a point-of-care test (POCT) in our Emergency Department (ED). TYPE OF STUDY: This prospective study enrolled 395 consecutive patients; paired nasopharyngeal swabs were collected from each study participant. The first swab was tested with the ID NOW COVID-19 assay at the point-of-care by ED nurses. The second swab was diluted in viral transport medium (VTM) and sent to the clinical microbiology department for analysis by both the RT-PCR Simplexa test COVID-19 Direct assay as the study reference method, and the ID NOW COVID-19 assay performed in the laboratory. RESULTS: Nasopharyngeal swabs directly tested with the ID NOW COVID-19 assay yielded a sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of 98.0%, 97.5%, 96.2% and 98.7%, respectively, in comparison with the RT-PCR study reference assay. When the ID NOW COVID-19 assay was performed in the laboratory using the VTM samples, the sensitivity decreased to 62.5% and the NPV to 79.7%. Three false negative test results were reported with the ID NOW COVID-19 assay when performed using undiluted swabs directly in the ED; these results were obtained from patients with elevated CT values (> 30). CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that the ID NOW COVID-19 assay, performed as a point of care test in the ED using dry swabs, provides a rapid and reliable alternative to laboratory-based RT-PCR methods.